Padilla defense seeks limits

What jury told is at issue

Government lawyers on Wednesday asked a Miami federal judge to prevent attorneys for Jose Padilla from informing jurors about his controversial 3 1/2- year detention as an enemy combatant.

In their motion, prosecutors contend that evidence related to the suspected al-Qaida agent's treatment in military custody is "plainly irrelevant" and could encourage jurors to find Padilla not guilty for reasons unrelated to the charges in the case.

Padilla's military confinement began in 2002 and does not have a bearing on the crimes he is charged with, the brief states. Those alleged offenses ended in 2001.

The motion was one of six filed by prosecutors on Wednesday seeking to limit the evidence jurors will be exposed to at the trial of Padilla and two co-defendants, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi.

The men are charged with being part of a North American terror cell that sent money, supplies and recruits to support violent Islamic groups overseas. Their trial is expected to start early next year before U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke.

The case is closely watched because it involves Padilla, 36, a former Broward County resident who government officials accused of taking part in a plot to detonate a radioactive or dirty bomb on U.S. soil. He has not been charged with that offense. Prosecutors said defense lawyers should be barred from telling jurors their clients were expressing religious or political speech protected by the First Amendment or that the defendants supported some groups that were also backed by the U.S. government.

In addition, defense attorneys should be stopped from invoking the Geneva Convention and questioning government witnesses about classified investigative sources and methods, prosecutors said.

Strict rules govern what evidence can be admitted in criminal trials. Defense lawyers in the case will likely file their own series of motions seeking to bar the government from introducing certain types of evidence. The attorneys could not be reached for comment.

Authorities arrested Padilla in May 2002 at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport and later transferred him to a U.S. Navy brig in South Carolina, where he was held without charges.

A case challenging his detention reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004, but the justices sent it back to the lower courts for further review without ruling. In 2005, the government ended that litigation by adding Padilla to an ongoing criminal case in Miami.

Padilla's lawyers claim his treatment at the Navy jail amounted to torture and included physical assaults, sleep deprivation, and involuntary drugging.

Prosecutors, who deny the allegations of abuse, said allowing defense lawyers to raise such claims at trial would "confuse and distract the jury" and shift the focus from the alleged crimes. The result could be a verdict based on jurors' notions of justice, not the evidence, prosecutors said.

The government won't present any evidence at trial derived from Padilla's detention, prosecutors said.

While the motion related to Padilla's military detention affects only him, the other motions pertain to all three defendants.

Prosecutors said the men should not be able to escape conviction by claiming the First Amendment protected their actions.

Vanessa Blum can be reached at vbblum@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4605.